2024년 해상․항공 분야 판례 회고

This article analyzes major Supreme Court decisions in maritime and aviation sectors from 2024. While there are relatively few cases in these fields, they address significant legal issues across diverse topics. A common thread among the selected rulings is their focus on international aspects and the distinction between commercial and consumer contracts. (1) The Supreme Court decision 2022Da201235(main suit), 2022Da201242(counterclaim) examined the validity and limitations of a knock-for-knock clause in a towage contract. The Supreme Court upheld the clause’s enforceability. However, given that the Korean Commercial Act imposes a duty of seaworthiness on carriers while prohibiting contractual exemptions from liability, the interplay between such mandatory provisions and the knock-for-knock clause emerged as a critical underlying issue. (2) The Supreme Court decision 2024Da254677(main suit) and 2024Da254684 (counterclaim) also concerned liability for damages arising from the performance of a towage contract, where the primary legal issue was the governing law of maritime liens. This case necessitated an examination of: (i) the governing law applicable to maritime liens, including exceptions for flag-of-convenience vessels, and (ii) the governing law for claims arising from breach of contract or tort under a towage contract. (3) The Supreme Court decision 2019Da261558 addressed the nature and enforceability of a liquidated damages clause in a charter contract governed by English law. The Court, applying the English law principle that penalty clauses are unenforceable (the Penalty Rule), reaffirmed the advanced legal interpretation provided in the Cavendish case that the legitimate interest in enforcing a contractual obligation extends beyond merely recovering the estimated maximum loss caused by a breach. (4) In 2024, the Supreme Court issued several decisions clarifying the governing law and exercise of subrogation rights in marine insurance, a set of issues which had unresolved uncertainties in legal practice. Notably, in 2019Da256501, the Court held that (i) the legal relationship of subrogation is governed by English law, as stipulated in the cargo insurance contract, and (ii) since the plaintiff failed to meet the assignment requirements under English law, it could not exercise the insured’s right to claim damages against the defendant. (5) Finally, in aviation sector, the Supreme Court decision 2021Da308030 examined the validity of the major airlines’ mileage program terms and conditions. While affirming the lower court’s finding that the contractual terms were not invalid, the decision further developed and refined the jurisprudence on unfair contract terms under the Act on the Regulation of Terms and Conditions, contributing to the advancement of judicial review of Contractual Terms for consumer protection.